Christopher Eden

Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis.

To map the fine‐touch pressure thresholds of the adult penis in circumcised and uncircumcised men, and to compare the two populations.

The Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: An International Multicenter Study

PURPOSE It is not yet possible to estimate the number of cases required for a beginner to become expert in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. We estimated the learning curve of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for positive surgical margins compared to a published learning curve for open radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS We reviewed records from 8,544 consecutive patients with prostate cancer treated laparoscopically by 51 surgeons at 14 academic institutions in Europe and the United States. The probability of a positive surgical margin was calculated as a function of surgeon experience with adjustment for pathological stage, Gleason score and prostate specific antigen. A second model incorporated prior experience with open radical prostatectomy and surgeon generation. RESULTS Positive surgical margins occurred in 1,862 patients (22%). There was an apparent improvement in surgical margin rates up to a plateau at 200 to 250 surgeries. Changes in margin rates once this plateau was reached were relatively minimal relative to the CIs. The absolute risk difference for 10 vs 250 prior surgeries was 4.8% (95% CI 1.5, 8.5). Neither surgeon generation nor prior open radical prostatectomy experience was statistically significant when added to the model. The rate of decrease in positive surgical margins was more rapid in the open vs laparoscopic learning curve. CONCLUSIONS The learning curve for surgical margins after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy plateaus at approximately 200 to 250 cases. Prior open experience and surgeon generation do not improve the margin rate, suggesting that the rate is primarily a function of specifically laparoscopic training and experience.

Robot-assisted and laparoscopic repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

CONTEXT Over the last two decades, minimally invasive treatment options for ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) have been developed and popularized. OBJECTIVE To critically analyze the current status of laparoscopic and robotic repair of UPJO. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A systematic literature review was performed in November 2012 using PubMed. Article selection proceeded according to the search strategy based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses criteria. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Multiple series of laparoscopic pyeloplasty have demonstrated high success rates and low perioperative morbidity in pediatric and adult populations, with both the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches. Data on pediatric robot-assisted pyeloplasty are increasingly becoming available. A larger number of cases have also been reported for adult patients, confirming that robotic pyeloplasty represents a viable option for either primary or secondary repair. Robot-assisted redo pyeloplasty has been mostly described in the pediatric population. Different technical variations have been implemented with the aim of tailoring the procedure to each specific case. The type of stenting, retrograde versus antegrade, continues to be debated. Internal-external stenting as well as a stentless approach have been used, especially in the pediatric population. Comparative studies demonstrate similar success and complication rates between minimally invasive and open pyeloplasty in both the adult and pediatric setting. A clear advantage in terms of hospital stay for minimally invasive over open pyeloplasty was observed only in the adult population. CONCLUSIONS Laparoscopy represents an efficient and effective less invasive alternative to open pyeloplasty. Robotic pyeloplasty is likely to emerge as the new minimally invasive standard of care whenever robotic technology is available because its precise suturing and shorter learning curve represent unique attractive features. For both laparoscopy and robotics, the technique can be tailored to the specific case according to intraoperative findings and personal surgical experience.

A Multinational, Multi-institutional Study Comparing Positive Surgical Margin Rates Among 22 393 Open, Laparoscopic, and Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Patients

BACKGROUND Positive surgical margins (PSMs) are a known risk factor for biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) and are potentially affected by surgical technique and volume. OBJECTIVE To investigate whether radical prostatectomy (RP) modality and volume affect PSM rates. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Fourteen institutions in Europe, the United States, and Australia were invited to participate in this study, all of which retrospectively provided margins data on 9778 open RP, 4918 laparoscopic RP, and 7697 robotic RP patients operated on between January 2000 and October 2011. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES The outcome measure was PSM rate. Multivariable logistic regression analyses and propensity score methods identified odds ratios for risk of a PSM for one modality compared with another, after adjustment for age, preoperative prostate-specific antigen, postoperative Gleason score, pathologic stage, and year of surgery. Classic adjustment using standard covariates was also implemented to compare PSM rates based on center volume for each minimally invasive surgical cohort. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Open RP patients had higher-risk PCa at time of surgery on average and were operated on earlier in the study time period on average, compared with minimally invasive cohorts. Crude margin rates were lowest for robotic RP (13.8%), intermediate for laparoscopic RP (16.3%), and highest for open RP (22.8%); significant differences persisted, although were ameliorated, after statistical adjustments. Lower-volume centers had increased risks of PSM compared with the highest-volume center for both laparoscopic RP and robotic RP. The study is limited by its nonrandomized nature; missing data across covariates, especially year of surgery in many of the open cohort cases; lack of standardized histologic processing and central pathology review; and lack of information regarding potential confounders such as patient comorbidity, nerve-sparing status, lymph node status, tumor volume, and individual surgeon caseload. CONCLUSIONS This multinational, multi-institutional study of 22 393 patients after RP suggests that PSM rates might be lower after minimally invasive techniques than after open RP and that PSM rates are affected by center volume in laparoscopic and robotic cases. PATIENT SUMMARY In this study, we compared the effectiveness of different types of surgery for prostate cancer by looking at the rates of cancer cells left at the margins of what was removed in the operations. We compared open, keyhole, and robotic surgery from many centers across the globe and found that robotic and keyhole operations appeared to have lower margin rates than open surgeries. How many cases a center and surgeon do seems to affect this rate for both robotic and keyhole procedures.

The first 1000 cases of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in the UK: evidence of multiple ‘learning curves’

To report the initial experience of one surgeon, with contemporary experience of both open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and reconstructive laparoscopy, in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) in 1000 patients, and to investigate the rate of change of various outcome variables for this procedure with time.

The British Association of Urological Surgeons: guidelines for training in laparoscopy

To report the guidelines of the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS), commissioned by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in response to safety concerns about the rapid uptake of new, complex laparoscopic procedures.

The impact of obesity on laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

To investigate the effect of obesity on the operative variables of patients undergoing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP).

Final outcomes of patients with low-risk prostate cancer suitable for active surveillance but treated surgically.

To study the outcomes of a contemporary cohort of patients referred from around the UK with low‐risk prostate cancer consistent with the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines for active surveillance but who were treated with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) in a single surgeon series.

Extended vs standard pelvic lymphadenectomy during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer.

Study Type – Therapy (case series)
Level of Evidence 4

Does prostate HistoScanning™ play a role in detecting prostate cancer in routine clinical practice? Results from three independent studies

To evaluate the ability of prostate HistoScanning™ (PHS; Advanced Medical Diagnostics, Waterloo, Belgium) to detect, characterize and locally stage prostate cancer, by comparing it with transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)‐guided prostate biopsies, transperineal template prostate biopsies (TTBs) and whole‐mount radical prostatectomy specimens.